What exactly is it that makes it so hard for people like rock to understand that scientists don't support the BBT or the ToE just because they want to but because it is what all evidence points at?

One of the major selling points of many brands of religion is The Truth™. They market from the standpoint that unlike all those other guys who weren't intelligent enough to invest in their product you - the smart, young, handsome/beautiful consumer- can be privy to a far higher level of knowledge as imparted by otherworldly sources! What an honor! You see, even the world's smartest men can't answer the difficult questions of the Universe, but this magic book can! Just bend knee to the Overlord here.

Religion is a package deal which often comes with a false sense of entitlement and superiority, and reinforces this through groupthink and the demonization of anyone who isn't already a yipping acolyte of their particular, narrow sect. Since a divine authority has to be assumed true from the outset in accordance with the Terms of Agreement, it doesn't matter if there isn't any empirical support for the numerous "just-so" assertions, or even if they are flatly contradicted by reality - all that matters is maintaining faith in the source, even if it means keeping reality at bay. If anyone has the audacity to claim that the Emperor isn't wearing any clothes, it's only because they aren't enlightened enough to detect the intricate beauty of the robes.

Thus, the lack of any actual engagement on rockv12's part. To him it doesn't even matter that he hasn't presented an actual argument. Snorting, "You actually believe that?!" and rolling his eyes constitutes a suitable refutation of the Big Bang and evolution in his eyes, because he's a bearer of The Truth™. See, since he already has The Truth™ and isn't persuaded, then everyone else must be wrong! To many religious followers, personal feelings are valid indicators of truth. Simply feeling that it's wrong is enough. The fact that he wasn't persuaded is evidence enough that it couldn't possibly be true. As for those scientists - why, if they were really sooooo smart, then they'd already be fellow sycophants of rockv12's specific faith and realize that The Truth™ contradicts what they're advocating! They're just coming to silly conclusions because since they reject The Truth™ they are flying blind!

I don't know, religion tends to be a bit pricey. Especially that Christianity one, since God has mandated that his personal mouthpieces be spiritually equipped with personal jets, mansions, and $30,000 watches.

A lot of you do not realize that there is ZERO evidence for the big bang. Atheist's will say "Religion was just made up to explain how the everything was made." WELL isn't that exactly what the big bang is too? There is no science to it. Someone made it up to explain how everything got here.

A lot of you do not realize that there is ZERO evidence for the big bang. Atheist's will say "Religion was just made up to explain how the everything was made." WELL isn't that exactly what the big bang is too? There is no science to it. Someone made it up to explain how everything got here.

Either Poe or troll. Which do you guys think it is? Definitely necromancer, though.

Logged

My names are many, yet I am One.-Orion, son of Fire and Light, Sol Invictus.

A lot of you do not realize that there is ZERO evidence for the big bang. Atheist's will say "Religion was just made up to explain how the everything was made." WELL isn't that exactly what the big bang is too? There is no science to it. Someone made it up to explain how everything got here.

One thing that always baffles me about theists like rock here is their assumption that scientists just go with completely unfounded theories and everybody runs with it for the sole reason that we can say "It disproves God."

Not only is there the utter ridiculousness of the idea that somehow hundred thousands of scientists worldwide accept a blatantly obvious faulty theory (It has to be because people like rock who know nothing about it take one look at it and just "know" it's wrong) without even one of them speaking out against it or showing how it's wrong in a scientific way, but there's also the complete disregard for the fact that when people began to search for knowledge they did so with the assumption that God was responsible for everything.

That's what makes it so hilarious. Science never started out to come up with something to disprove God. People started looking for knowledge and they expected to find evidence for God's doing. Surprise, they did not.

What exactly is it that makes it so hard for people like rock to understand that scientists don't support the BBT or the ToE just because they want to but because it is what all evidence points at?

I would like you to present some of the so called evidence they have for the big bang theory.

A lot of you do not realize that there is ZERO evidence for the big bang. Atheist's will say "Religion was just made up to explain how the everything was made." WELL isn't that exactly what the big bang is too? There is no science to it. Someone made it up to explain how everything got here.

Welcome to the forum, nicetry54.

You may not have noticed, but the last entry on this thread before yours was over a year ago. Commenting on threads that old is considered "thread necromancy" and discouraged. If the topic interests you, try to find a more recent thread on it.

Also, you evidently didn't read the thread very closely or you would have seen evidence and relevant links presented that make the case for the Big Bang. Even if you're resurrecting a dead thread, showing that you've actually read at least some of it is considered courteous.

A lot of you do not realize that there is ZERO evidence for the big bang. Atheist's will say "Religion was just made up to explain how the everything was made." WELL isn't that exactly what the big bang is too? There is no science to it. Someone made it up to explain how everything got here.

I'm presuming the previous 53 tries failed too?

Logged

Christian: "My faith grows every day."Atheist: "So does rhubarb, and for the same reason."

My apologies for the "thread necromancy". I did as you said and went back to the thread,read it very carefully, and still did not see a link or any evidence. And William I meant the regular kind of evidence sorry I'll try to be more clear next time. But Ataraxia if you have to be reduced to insulting me I've already won the argument. If you must ask it was just a random number that I chose. I was just researching information, saw this page and thought it would be fun but I've already wasted too much time on here. I'll come back later for that evidence.

My apologies for the "thread necromancy". I did as you said and went back to the thread,read it very carefully, and still did not see a link or any evidence. And William I meant the regular kind of evidence sorry I'll try to be more clear next time. But Ataraxia if you have to be reduced to insulting me I've already won the argument. If you must ask it was just a random number that I chose. I was just researching information, saw this page and thought it would be fun but I've already wasted too much time on here. I'll come back later for that evidence.

There are plenty of library books available. You should not expect anyone to give you a whole course personally.

My apologies for the "thread necromancy". I did as you said and went back to the thread,read it very carefully, and still did not see a link or any evidence. And William I meant the regular kind of evidence sorry I'll try to be more clear next time. But Ataraxia if you have to be reduced to insulting me I've already won the argument. If you must ask it was just a random number that I chose. I was just researching information, saw this page and thought it would be fun but I've already wasted too much time on here. I'll come back later for that evidence.

I'm uncertain how much time you've spent on here, so perhaps I'm speaking out of turn, but to be honest, if making 3 posts and reading through this thread is something you'd consider 'wasting too much time', may I suggest that perhaps the reason that you've not seen any supporting evidence for the Big Bang theory is that you haven't spent sufficient time looking for it yourself?

Logged

"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."

My apologies for the "thread necromancy". I did as you said and went back to the thread,read it very carefully, and still did not see a link or any evidence. And William I meant the regular kind of evidence sorry I'll try to be more clear next time. But Ataraxia if you have to be reduced to insulting me I've already won the argument. If you must ask it was just a random number that I chose. I was just researching information, saw this page and thought it would be fun but I've already wasted too much time on here. I'll come back later for that evidence.

You've read the whole thread back, that's over 750 posts and subsequent links, in around 12 minutes? You're either Johnny 5 or I can smell bovine sphincter.

« Last Edit: November 11, 2013, 04:44:20 PM by Ataraxia »

Logged

Christian: "My faith grows every day."Atheist: "So does rhubarb, and for the same reason."

Hello Nicetry54, First things first. Does your name have anything to do with Car 54 where are you? The show/ the movie.

Next, be honest, you want us to show you things to read and study showing possible evidence for the big bang, and you will say, here, read this book - evidence for god - the bible, and argue there is no difference. The difference between you and I is I have read and studied a lot of both. I was a Christian for many years, and after thinking through all the reasons for my view on the existence of god, I realized I no longer believe that any god has ever existed. As of now, studying why science believes the big bang existed/exists, I am of the opinion that the big bang is true. As science discovers more, my view of the big bang will certainly change.

In case you are interested in studying the reasons science feels the big bang is true, here is a list:

(as an aside, since NASA is first on the list, and I believe NASA helped invent the microwave oven, think of ways you would prove to someone that a microwave oven exists)

A lot of you do not realize that there is ZERO evidence for the big bang. Atheist's will say "Religion was just made up to explain how the everything was made." WELL isn't that exactly what the big bang is too? There is no science to it. Someone made it up to explain how everything got here.

I strongly recommend you read that page in its entirety, but to summarize a few of the pieces of evidence listed on that page:

As you increase the scale at which you view the universe, everything looks pretty much the same no matter which direction you look. This is known as large scale homogeneity, and is was a key prediction when the Big Bang Theory was derived from general relativity.

The cosmic microwave background radiation, which is highly uniform no matter which way you look, and is arguably the strongest piece of evidence that supports the Big Bang Theory. If there were no Big Bang, there would be no reason to expect such a background to exist.

The fact that we have never observed any stellar object that is older than about 13 billion years is also strong support of the theory.

The existence of dark matter, which was inferred from galactic velocities and stellar rotation around galaxies, long before the BBT was considered as a theory. The fact that the BBT predicts the existence of dark matter therefore gives it strong support.

There's plenty more information on that page, and I recommend reading it fully. But this should give you an example of how strongly supported BBT really is.

Logged

Nullus In Verba, aka "Take nobody's word for it!" If you can't show it, then you don't know it.

Also, the cosmic background radiation was predicted years before we had the equipment to detect and identify it.

Which means scientists predicted that there would be background radiation in 1948, and in 1965, when instruments capable of detecting said radiation were hooked up to antennas, they picked it up. That wasn't what the people who discovered it were trying to do. They were working on microwave communications, but they kept picking up too much radiation. Putting their heads together with physicists, they figured out what it was.

While predicting something and then finding it isn't absolute proof, it sure points in the right direction.

You probably don't want to hear the latest scientific scuttlebutt, that the big bang happened inside of a black hole and that is where new universes come from. No proof of that, but it is a possibility.

A lot of you do not realize that there is ZERO evidence for the big bang. Atheist's will say "Religion was just made up to explain how the everything was made." WELL isn't that exactly what the big bang is too? There is no science to it. Someone made it up to explain how everything got here.

If you have to be reduced to insulting me I've already won the argument.

Not really, NT54; I think you insulted yourself beyond redemption by claiming that there was no evidence for the Big Bang. That indicates to Me that either you haven't researched the matter at all, or that you get your science information from sub-standard sources.

Before we waste time looking up evidence for you to peruse, I think that we should know a bit about your academic level. What's the highest grade you obtained, and what's your understanding of physics and mathematics? If you're weak in either area, it'll take a little bit longer to bring you up to speed on the BBT.